“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>Scholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>Data from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>Results reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Research limitations/implications</jats:title><jats:p>This exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title><jats:p>Results highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>This research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Impression management by academic lectures in their own opinion and the students

“…Radford, V. Kitzie, S. Mikitish, D. Floegel, G.P Radford, L.S. Connaway (Radford et al, 2020). The authors conducted qualitative research considering the impact on scientific identity of online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu, and Twitter.…”

“…The authors use "scholarly identity platforms" in their areas of interest, concluding that they benefit from development opportunities or support academic libraries. On the other hand, they indicated that their participation is also associated with reputational risk (Radford et al, 2020). The public discourse of scientists is related to their identity.…”

Trust in the academy: a conceptual framework for understanding trust on academic web profiles

“…Although several studies have found that non-use or very limited use of web profiles is common (e.g. Bukvova, 2012;Francke, 2019;Greifeneder et al, 2018;Van Noorden, 2014), other studies with researchers (primarily but not exclusively from the Global North) have shown what features encourage use of profiles both as author and as audience (Greifeneder et al, 2018;Jordan, 2019a;Jordan and Weller, 2018;Kjellberg and Haider, 2018;Meishar-Tal and Pieterse, 2017;Nicholas et al, 2014;Radford et al, 2020;Van Noorden, 2014). These features range from networking opportunities to keeping up-to-date and to promoting one's work.…”

“…Concern with the credibility of the for-profit platforms hosting the profiles has also been voiced in interviews with researchers (e.g. Radford et al , 2020). In their estimation of what factors may contribute to building reputation for a researcher, based on a literature review, Herman and Nicholas (2019) conclude that several academic activities may be of importance for reputation but that teaching has the least potential.…”

“…The function outlined above of these web profiles, and the one which has achieved most scholarly attention, concerns how the profiles add to and support the researchers as "entrepreneurial selves" (Br€ ockling, 2016), who promote themselves and, not least, their publications. At the same time, the profiles also fulfill a need, for various stakeholders, as a source for learning more about a researcher in the context of activities associated with career development, employment and collaboration (Greifeneder et al, 2018;Jordan, 2019a;N andez and Borrego, 2013;Radford et al, 2020). As part of international research communities, researchers are invited to take on various positions of trust, such as to review publications, sit on committees for appointments and examinations, or be partners in research projects (N andez and Borrego, 2013).…”